Change initiatives usually fall short for human rather than technical reasons: weak executive sponsorship, an unclear case for change, managers who are not equipped to lead their teams through it, and no measurement of whether people actually adopt the new way of working. The often-quoted claim that 70% of change fails has no firm evidence behind it; what credible research does show is that only about a third of change programmes fully meet their goals.
You will often hear that 70% of change initiatives fail. It is worth knowing that this figure has no solid evidence base. A peer-reviewed review traced it to a 1993 "unscientific estimate" about business re-engineering that was then repeated from source to source without supporting data, and whose own authors later disowned it (Hughes, Journal of Change Management, 2011). What reputable surveys do consistently find is more useful: only around a third of change programmes fully achieve their goals (McKinsey, 2009 to 2021; BCG, 2019). The reasons they fall short are well documented, and they are mostly about people, not technology.
The factors that most often derail change
- Weak or invisible sponsorship. Prosci's benchmarking research has identified active, visible executive sponsorship as the single biggest contributor to change success in every study since 1998. When senior leaders hand the change to a project team and carry on as before, everyone reads the signal.
- An unclear reason for change. If people cannot explain in a sentence why the change is happening, they will not carry it. John Kotter identified a missing sense of urgency and an under-communicated vision among the most common reasons transformations stall.
- Unsupported managers. Employees take their lead on change from their immediate manager, yet research repeatedly finds that only a minority of organisations equip managers for that role (Prosci).
- No measurement of adoption. When go-live is treated as the finish line, nobody notices people quietly returning to the old way. Without reinforcement, change reverts.
What actually moves the odds
None of these are solved by a thicker project plan. They are addressed by engaging the right people in the right order, equipping the managers who carry the change, and measuring adoption as seriously as budget and timeline. Studies of why change succeeds or fails point consistently to these human factors rather than to the technical solution (for example IBM's research found that shifting mindsets and culture were the top barriers to change). That reframing is where our work starts.
Next step: if a programme is stalling, a focused diagnostic usually finds the cause quickly. Explore CCG Advisory.